Answer

Motivation refers to the use of certain factors to stimulate energy and desire of individuals towards continually being committed and interested in a given activity so as to attain a certain goal. According to Ryan and Deci (2000), a motivated person has the impetus and the inspiration towards an end. Notably, every person involved in any kind of activity, be it work or leisure is concerned about motivation. As noted by Ryan and Deci (2000), people require different amounts and kinds of motivation and, as such, motivation can never be regarded as a unitary phenomenon. Indeed, people vary in terms of the level of motivation they need as well as the orientation of that motivation. The orientation of an individual’s motivation is underpinned by the attitudes and goals of that individual that induces an action. Ryan and Deci (2000), opines that different kinds of motivation are induced by different goals or reasons for a particular action. According to Self-Determination Theory, motivation can be categorized as intrinsic motivation or extrinsic motivation. This paper seeks to explore the interaction between intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. The paper will be divided into three section; A, B and C. Section A of the paper will explore the theoretical overview of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation while section B will describe the relevant characteristics of private elementary schools and the environment in which schools operate. The final section of this a paper, section C, will make recommendations to schools about their existing policies around intrinsic and extrinsic motivation of students.  

Part A: Theoretical Overview of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation

Intrinsic motivation is a kind of motivation induced by the inherent satisfaction an individual derives from the doing of an activity. An intrinsically motivated individual is stimulated by the fun or challenges associated with the performance of the act. The behavior of such a person is not influenced by the external prods, pressures, or rewards (Ryan & Deci 2000). The intrinsic motivation phenomenon was evidenced by the findings of experimental studies on animal behavior that posits that organisms engage in curiosity and exploratory behaviors without re-enforcement or reward. Evidently, organisms engage in such spontaneous behaviors solely due to the positive experiences they derive from such activities in terms of extending and exercising their capacities. Intrinsic motivation, though not the only kind of motivation in humans, is very pervasive and important in human beings. Right from birth, humans demonstrate intrinsic motivation in their tendencies to remain playful, curious and inquisitive creatures with ubiquitous readiness to learn and explore without extraneous incentives (Ryan & Deci 2000). Notably, the physical, cognitive and social development in humans is critically underpinned by this natural motivation tendency that moves an individual to actions that enhance his growth and skills development. However, intrinsic motivation is more often than not assumed to be a constant that is exogenously given thus, normally neglected by much of economic theory. As noted by Frey and Jegen (2001), this neglect of intrinsic motivation by economic theory is attributed to an inability to determine the part of an individual’s motivation that is intrinsic from that which is extrinsic. Indeed, intrinsic motivation, though plays a critical role in areas of the society and economy, is difficult to control compared to the vast range of extrinsic motivators that are readily available.

On the other hand, extrinsic motivation is a kind of motivation induced by some separable outcome (Frey & Jegen 2001). It involves the doing of an activity for the purpose of attaining some separable outcome. Evidently, there exists a sharp contrast between extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation, which is induced by the inherent satisfaction derived from the doing of an activity (Ryan & Deci 2000). The interaction between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation can be stipulated by the Motivation Crowding Theory. This theory allows the exploration of a continuum between purely extrinsically induced individual and purely intrinsically induced individual. According to the Motivation Crowding Theory, the movement between crowding-out and crowding-in of intrinsic motivation is attributed to two different factors; change in preferences and change in the perceived nature of the activity to e performed in an individual’s self-perception and the environment (Frey & Jegen 2001). Change in preferences, according to Motivation Crowding Theory, is based on the observation that the behavior of an agent reveals a significant influence of external interventions on intrinsic motivation. Indeed, the change in the behavior of individuals is attributed to a change in preference. Similarly, change in the perceived nature of the activity to be performed in an individual’s self-perception and the environment has a significant influence on the intrinsic motivation of an individual. Indeed, extrinsic factors have a significant influence on intrinsic motivation through their impact on an agent’s self-confidence and perception on the nature of a task (Kreps 1997). It is important to note that although extrinsic motivation may induce an individual to behave in a particular way; this form of motivation may only be short-term weak reinforcers. Additionally, extrinsic motivation may have hidden costs whereby, once withdrawn, they turn to negative reinforcers by adversely impacting on intrinsic motivation. For instance, offering low-powered incentives induces a sense of trust by the principle in the agent thereby enhancing the agent’s self-esteem and confidence leading to increased intrinsic motivation. Conversely, extrinsic motivation such as rewards reduces the intrinsic motivation of the agent to perform a similar activity in future (Benabou, & Tirole, 2003).  According to Frey and Jegen (2001), the introduction of extrinsic motivators such as monetary rewards has negative impact on an individual’s performance of an activity as it decreases the intrinsic motivation of the person for that specific task under identifiable conditions. For instance, the effect of crowding out of task-specific intrinsic motivation of an individual is evidenced by the potential subsequent reduction of efforts put into the task as a result of the extrinsic motivation in the form of monetary rewards for performing the task (Ryan & Deci 2000). On one hand, the self-perception theory is grounded in the assumption that individuals do not perfectly know why they are performing a task, particularly, they lack perfect knowledge about the extent to which the intrinsic features of a task motivate their behavior (Fehr, & Falk, 2002). Consequently, individuals infer their motives based on the nature of the task in efforts to determine why they are performing a task. For example, in a case where an individual is induced to perform a task by external incentives regardless of the hedonic nature of such a task, such individual would potentially infer his behavior to be extrinsically motivated. On the other hand, in a case where an individual performs a task associated with very low and non-salient external incentives, such individual would potential infer his behavior to be intrinsically motivated (Fehr, & Falk, 2002). Additionally, self-perception theorists consider a task as over-sufficiently justified when the task has both strong and salient external incentives and at the same time, intrinsically rewarding. They assert that when an individual performs a task with specific and salient external incentives with uncertainty shrouding the intrinsic features of the task then the performance of the over-sufficiently justified task will be attributed to external incentives by the individual (Fehr, & Falk, 2002). However, if the task is performed without external incentives, the individual would infer the performance of the task to be intrinsically motivated (Fehr, & Falk, 2002). It is imperative to acknowledge the fact that withdrawal of salient external incentive potentially lowers the intrinsic motivation of individuals. This, economically, implies that initial experience of external incentive induces a higher marginal disutility of effort upon withdrawal of such incentives (Fehr, & Falk, 2002).

On the other hand, cognitive evaluation theory is grounded in the assumption that individuals psychologically need competence and self-determination. Under this theory, efforts on perceived competence and self-determination determine the impact of external rewards on intrinsic motivation (Fehr, & Falk, 2002). For instance, perceiving external rewards as controlling undermines intrinsic motivation by adversely impacting on the autonomy of the individual hence reducing the individual’s satisfaction from his autonomy. In contrast, external rewards that inform an individual about his competence enhances the intrinsic motivation of the individual by satisfying his need for competence. According to the theory, contingent rewards are considered as potentially controlling and, as such, undermines intrinsic motivation of individuals (Fehr, & Falk, 2002).

In light of the above-discussed theories, it is evidently clear that extrinsic motivation can negatively impact intrinsic motivation through hidden costs. Hidden costs of extrinsic motivation consist of all external interventions, that is, interventions emanating from outside of the individual in consideration, including the positive monetary rewards as well as the negative sanctions that accompany regulations; all of which may affect intrinsic motivation (Frey & Jegen 2001). Moreover, intrinsic motivation may be crowded out or crowded in by external interventions. As noted above, crowding out, according to the self-perception theory, occurs due to the saliency of external rewards that induce individuals to infer the external rewards as the cause of their behavior whereas the cognitive evolution theory infers the controlling aspects of the reward as the cause of the reduction in intrinsic motivation. However, the external reward may also induce a feeling that the principals consider the task as less interesting thereby affecting the perception of the agents on the task.

Considering a private elementary school as a type of firm, it is important to point out that the educational activities prescribed in schools are less intrinsically interesting leading to the increased extrinsic motivation of students (Ryan & Deci 2000). Indeed, private elementary schools should employ policies and regulations, commonly referred to as school rules and regulations, which spell out the consequences of inappropriate behavior among students. Additionally, such organizations should have set standards of performance for students enrolling in the institution that acts as a source of extrinsic motivation for students to maintain a given level of academic performance. The environment in which such firms operate should be sensitive to national regulations formulated by the ministry of education that set certain standards for the enrolment of learners. Notably, such firms should employ different regulations in different circumstances. For instance, they should use external regulation in circumstances requiring extrinsic motivation with least autonomy (Ryan & Deci 2000). In such circumstances, policies should be designed to regulate behaviors of students towards satisfying an external demand. Additionally, the schools should employ introjected regulation through policies that regulate the behavior of learners by imposing pressure on the students to attain ego-enhancements through good performance and, in the process, improving the self-esteem of the learners. Also, the institutions should employ regulation through identification as a form of extrinsic motivation. In this circumstance, the school should adopt policies that help the students to identify with the personal importance of the prescribed behavior (Ryan & Deci 2000). This way, the students will accept the regulation as their own behavior. Finally, the schools should employ integrated regulation in circumstances where the identified policies have been assimilated by students. Notably, this form of regulation will allow self-examination and enable students to bring new regulations into congruence with their needs and values (Ryan & Deci 2000).

Part B: Description of Private Elementary Schools

This section presents a description of private elementary schools in terms of characteristics and the environment in which they operate. Elementary schools are characterized by learning activities in which students, teachers, and parents perform different roles in ensuring the attainment of the overall goal of the institution; intellectual development and academic performance of the learners. In this environment, teachers engage learners in the learning process through classroom discussions, homework and assignments while parents perform their role of supporting their children in all aspects as regards their schooling (Shernoff et al. 2014). Notably, the private sector of education is characterized by intense competition among players in the sector with the most competitive advantage is the good academic result. As a result, private elementary schools often employ policies and regulations, commonly referred to as school rules and regulations, to foster good behavior and performance among students. Indeed, such schools motivate students to work hard in their studies through a number of ways so as to encourage good performance. For instance, the schools have set standards of performance for students enrolling in the institution that acts as a source of extrinsic motivation for students to maintain a given level of academic performance. It is important to note that different students experience different kinds of motivation with either intrinsic or extrinsic orientation. The environment in which such firms operate significantly influenced by the national regulations formulated by the ministry of education that set certain standards for the enrolment of learners as well as certain minimum requirements for the operation of such organizations (Koc, Isiksal, & Bulut, 2007). Additionally, the learning environment of these organizations is characterized by praises and criticism of learners by teachers and parents as a form of motivation to good performance. Well-performing students are materially rewarded for good performance while the poor performing students are criticized and encouraged to put more effort. These efforts are focused on motivating learners to perform well (Lai, 2011). The schools use external regulation in circumstances requiring extrinsic motivation with least autonomy. In such circumstances, policies are designed to regulate behaviors of students towards satisfying an external demand. For instance, some students are extrinsically motivated to work hard on a subject because they fear parental suctions for performing poorly. In such a case, the student is motivated to work hard so as to avoiding parental sanction as a separable outcome (Ryan & Deci 2000). Additionally, the schools employ introjected regulation through policies that regulate the behavior of learners by imposing pressure on the students to attain ego-enhancements through good performance and, in the process, improving the self-esteem of the learners. For instance, some students work hard on a subject because they consider the subject critical for their chosen career. This group of students is equally motivated extrinsically because their motivation is induced by the instrumental value of the subject (Ryan & Deci 2000). Also, the institutions should employ regulation through identification as a form of extrinsic motivation. In this circumstance, the school has policies that help the students to identify with the personal importance of the prescribed behavior. Although both of the examples above demonstrate the involvement of instrumentalities, the former case demonstrates a mere compliance with an external control while the latter case entails a feeling of choice and personal endorsement (Ryan & Deci 2000). However, both cases represent intentional behavior induced by different forms of extrinsic motivation with varied level of autonomy. 

Part C: Recommendations

 As noted above, educational activities prescribed in schools are less intrinsically interesting thereby calling for the need to adopt policies and approaches that motivate students to self-regulate and derive intrinsic satisfaction from such activities without external influence. However, the crowding out effect is evident in elementary school settings whereby teachers and parents often find it difficult to intrinsically motivate children to work hard by arousing the intrinsic satisfaction from in the children. Under learning circumstances within a school, as an organization, intrinsic motivation of children should be fostered through the adoption of policies that emphasize frequent feedback to children on information about their ability to satisfy their need for self-perception and competence thereby enhancing intrinsic motivation among individual learners. Additionally, elementary schools should adopt policies that communicate the pleasure for learning and the rewards of education so as to enhance intrinsic motivation towards education. However, under the circumstances of behavior correction of children in school, the school as a firm should adopt policies that promote external interventions with deterrent value. Under this circumstance, the extrinsic motivation of children to practice good behavior should be fostered through policies focused on separable consequences of bad conduct. In this type of organization, the behavior of students as an agent is significantly influenced by external interventions on intrinsic motivation. As noted above, intrinsic motivation is very pervasive and important in human beings and is demonstrated by humans, right from birth, in their tendencies to remain playful, curious and inquisitive creatures with ubiquitous readiness to learn and explore without extraneous incentives. Furthermore, the physical, cognitive and social development in humans is critically underpinned by this natural motivation tendency that moves an individual to actions that enhance his growth and skills development. Therefore, by adopting policies that promote intrinsic motivation in schools, the organization would significantly improve academic performance and intellectual capacity of the learners as they get induced into actions that enhance their growth and skills development.

Conclusion

In conclusion, motivation refers to the use of certain factors to stimulate energy and desire of individuals towards continually being committed and interested in a given activity so as to attain a certain goal. There are two orientations of motivation; intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is a kind of motivation induced by the inherent satisfaction an individual derives from the doing of an activity. An intrinsically motivated individual is stimulated by the fun or challenges associated with the performance of the act. The behavior of such a person is not influenced by the external prods, pressures, or rewards. On the other hand, extrinsic motivation is a kind of motivation induced by some separable outcome. It involves the doing of an activity for the purpose of attaining some separable outcome. The interaction between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation can be stipulated by the Motivation Crowding Theory. This theory allows the exploration of a continuum between purely extrinsically induced individual and purely intrinsically induced individual. According to this theory, the change in the behavior of individuals is attributed to a change in preference and; change in the perceived nature of the activity to be performed in an individual’s self-perception and the environment has a significant influence on the intrinsic motivation of an individual. The self-perception theory, on the other hand, holds that individuals infer their motives based on the nature of the task in efforts to determine why they are performing a task. Also, the cognitive evolution theory posits that efforts on perceived competence and self-determination determine the impact of external rewards on intrinsic motivation. It is evidently clear that intrinsic motivation is passive yet very important in the performance of tasks. Therefore, an organization like schools should adopt policies that promote intrinsic motivation in learners to ensure effective learning and skill development.